Esquire magazine came out with its’ annual Best and Worst Dressed Lists, and they named Britney Spears’ baby, Sean Preston Federline, as “Worst Dressed Man in the World.”

C’mon guys. This is the worst kind of cheap shot for a few reasons: 1) the target is a baby…a baby!, 2) the target can’t fight back…because he’s a baby!, 3) he doesn’t even dress himself…since he’s a baby!! and last but not least 4) the title is “Worst Dressed Man in the world,” but he doesn’t even qualify as a toddler, let alone a man…because he’s a baby!!! Are you seeing a pattern here yet?

There are plenty of reasons to ridicule the way Britney and Kevin have behaved over the last couple of years, but there’s a real red line when it comes to taking it out on an infant. The attempt to sell magazines by exploiting a baby is so dirty it just oozes disgusting, nasty, amoral opportunism at its worst.

The editors really do owe the family an apology. There is no excuse for bringing the baby into their sleazefest…

MTV2 aired a cartoon, “Where My Dogs At?,” which satirized Snoop Dogg parading around with women on leashes, and all of a sudden black “leaders” are all up in arms about it.

This isn’t new. Snoop Dogg, and rappers in general, have been criticized in many circles for their misogynistic and demeaning lyrics and behavior for years. There’s no real debate among objective observers that the lyrics and behavior are exactly that. The defense has always been that they’re “keeping it real” and that everyone other than blacks just doesn’t understand how it’s OK for them to treat and portray women that way. And for just as many years, these very same black “leaders” have been completely silent about it.

So Viacom airs an episode which satirizes this real-life behavior, and now it’s “misogynist, racist and crude”? Huh? Who are the racists here?

The answer is plainly obvious: it’s the “prominent African-Americans” who are the cowards and the racists here. They’re cowardly because they know that if they criticize Snoop Dogg, who is hugely popular - especially amongst younger rank-and-file blacks, they will alienate their own base and call to task a member of their own race - whether it’s Snoop Dogg or anyone else. But because they are also black, they are immune from criticism. So the “leaders” can’t do that: it would require actual moral conviction and courage. Neither of which they have.

So who do they pick? Viacom, because there’s a chance they can extort a “donation” or some sort of other concession from Viacom’s deep pockets to avoid being seen as racist. Instead of identifying and trying to solve a huge and growing problem within their own ethnic community, they level baseless charges against those of other races in order to perpetuate the politics and emotions of racial division from which they make their bread and butter. It’s this kind of baseless hate-mongering that encourages racial division and prejudice. To what end? To line the pockets of an elite few “prominent African-Americans” whose only real interest is exploiting race for profit and power.

Attention “prominent African-Americans”: if you have a problem with Snoop Dogg’s misogyny, take it up with him and rappers like him and leave Viacom out of it. Otherwise, you’re just blatantly playing the race card for your own enrichment, and I’m calling your bluff…

This is one of the downsides of fame: freeloading friends who try to take advantage of you. Bruce Willis has filed a lawsuit against his freeloading friend after that friend allegedly tried to extort money and a car from him.

From the article, it sounds like Bruce Willis had a loser friend he was trying to help out by letting him stay at one of his homes and giving him a nominal job (probably as a tax write-off to cover supporting this guy). I can only speculate that some sort of falling out happened between them, (something like Bruce saying enough’s enough and you need to go get a life) and this moron decided he was going to hold Bruce Willis’ personal photos and other stuff hostage to one last big pay day.

I feel for Bruce Willis who by all accounts is a decent person and, in this situation, seems like he was just trying to help out a friend. We’ve all had that friend who turned on you and stuck a knife in your back when you least expected it, or the ex who wouldn’t return personal possession for petty reasons: the only difference here is a matter of scale…

* Headline reference for those who don’t remember: Years ago, Kato Kaelin got famous as the freeloading loser friend of OJ Simpson during the aftermath of OJ’s murder of his ex-wife and a local waiter.

It’s a small price to pay to see the Pussycat Dolls, but a promoter has to pay US$2,714 in fines for their performance in Subang Jaya, Malaysia. Were they drunk and disorderly? Did they destroy the premises? Were the fans overly rowdy? No, no and no…They were just too hot and sexy…

It’s hardly a surprise that a group best known for performing in skimpy lingerie would be considered sexy, and if I were them I’d offer to pay the promoter’s fine for the free publicity that this sort of stupidity is going to garner them worldwide.

According to the article, all Western acts going into Malaysia are being warned against such outrageous behavior as wearing shorts (gasp!) and screaming (the cads!). Maybe if Malaysians were more worried about their poverty rate and Islamic terrorists than what entertainers are wearing, they wouldn’t have so many problems…Talk about your misplaced priorities…

For those who may not know or remember, Natalie Maines decided to score some cheap political points at a concert overseas a couple of years back by trash-talking President Bush from the stage. As country music is the heart of America’s “Red States,” their fans were furious and retaliated by boycotting their music and crushing their CDs under bulldozers.

The Dixie Chicks have their right to say whatever they want, but their fans have their right to have their say too. That’s the flip side of the First Amendment: people who disagree with you can’t be silenced either. The Chicks have never “gotten” that: Maines used the power and platform she had to make her views known, and the fans used the power and platform they had to make their opposing views known. It wasn’t (and isn’t) censorship or persecution, it’s freedom of speech: they just don’t like it when it’s someone else’s turn to talk.

These are the choices that ordinary folks like you and me have to face every day. Running your mouth at work can get you in trouble with the boss, so there are many times we have to bite our tongues and keep our opinions to ourselves rather than risk our employment. The Dixie Chicks are a reminder to all celebrities that they have bosses too: us.

Without us spending our hard-earned money on their concert tickets, CDs, and memorabilia they’d be playing for quarters at a bus stop. Occasionally, it’s good for celebrities to be reminded of that basic truth.

When you go out of your way to offend your fans, as Maines did, there are going to be consequences: especially when your very next move is to release a song which talks about how you’re “Not Ready to Make Nice.” The Dixie Chicks are now finding out the hard way that country music fans aren’t either: they’re having to cancel concerts all over the country.

They’re trying to put a positive spin on it by claiming that they’re replacing the U.S. concert dates with dates in Canada, but there’s a reason those venues weren’t on the schedule in the first place: they’re smaller and there’s less money to be made there. There’s really no way to put lipstick on this pig: their insistence on putting their politics before their music is costing them in a big way.

But the Dixie Chicks are just the most visible example of fan backlash against outspoken celebrities. I would wager that a significant portion of Hollywood’s box office woes are due to fans refusing to pay outrageous cinema prices to put money in the pockets of celebrities who insult their political views.

Because the country is fairly evenly split between opposing political views, celebrities who come out forcefully for one side or the other - especially when they do so in an insulting and demeaning way as the Dixie Chicks did - are bound to make at least half their fan base mad. And when the overwhelming majority of your fan base is on the opposite side of the political fence, you’re just asking for a major career nosedive: and the Dixie Chicks are getting just that.

You can call the Dixie Chicks brave for making a stand, but you’d be wrong: they were ignorant and foolish. If your buddy marched into his boss’ office, got up on his desk and proceeded to lecture him about the evils of capitalism and got fired for it, would you congratulate him on his principled stand or look at him like he was crazy for doing that at work? He can get drunk and pontificate on the evils of capitalism after work at the bar all he wants, but when he does it at work he’s going to have to expect there to be consequences…just ask the Dixie Chicks…

Sometimes celebrities have no idea just how ridiculous they sound when they open their mouths - especially certain teenage starlets. She starts off with a noble enough goal: to entertain the troops. But why, you ask? Because she sees herself as “this beautiful sex kitten, who’s basically a pinup” - just like Marilyn Monroe. Nice ego there, chica… But the cake topper was that “she would prepare for her trip to Iraq by taking shooting lessons with her security guard.” Because 100,000 GIs, and a special security detail might all drop the ball in the event of an emergency, but the teenage girl will save them all with a couple of hours of target practice after yet another long night of partying.

I don’t know about you, but I’m sure going to sleep safer tonight knowing that Lindsay Lohan is going to be standing on the wall…

This is an Adriana Lima post too…

This is an Adriana Lima post.